Buying URLs for the sake of it

[Ali-v-8]

I have a client who told me he has been optimised.:rolleyes:
I try and be nice and say "no you haven't"
He says "yes i have"
I say " oohhh no you havent" and it turns into a bit of a pantomime.

Then he asks me "Why is my website not optimised?"
After 2 hours explaining the basics and pointing out factors that a blind rabbit jacked up on carrots would spot he tells me this.

"They bought me 12 web addresses with the targeted keyterms in the url. Google loves this":eek::mad::|
"aaaaarrrghhh" i said in a plain sweet voice that could only be matched by an angel.(hells angel)
I checked out the urls.
After the initial shock i made my first call to this so called seo company and asked..

Question: Why have you copied content from the original website and put it on separate urls and then told the client that this is beneficial.

Answer: Cos google love this (omg), and every SEO that is successful does it.

I for one don't. anyone else like to comment on the suitability of this technique.

buying a url with the name in is not a bad idea.

Buying loads of different urls and copying the website into multiple versions is a definite waste of money.

[sirearl]

well if they are using the same website content on every URL .

In theory only 1 site will be indexed owing to duplicate content.

Quite common to use several keyword rich domains ,but definitely with different content.

Earl

[DanHarrison]

Ha, I love these horror stories. There are so many myths in the website world, particularly with SEO.

Dan

[mattsaw]

I'm constantly having this debate (battle) with clients. Even with the duplicate content issue aside there seems to be a popular misconception that 1 site = 1 x the traffic therefore 5 sites = 5 x traffic.

Whereas in actual fact 5 x sites = 5 times the effort to market, promote and link-build for.

You'll also lose the authority effect, 1000 links pointing to one domain is far more effective than 500 links pointing to two domains. This post by Rand explains things pretty well - http://www.seomoz.org/blog/understanding-root-domains-subdomains-vs-subfolders-microsites

IMO the ONLY reason to buy and use separate TLDs is when,

a) Targeting a different geographical market
b ) For branding reasons
c ) If you plan on selling off part of the business as a going concern

Any other useage of more than one TLD is almost certainly going to have a negative effect.

[irishguru]

It's not viable but it is being taught out there somewhere. God bless the SEO's that get sucked into this train of thought.

[Toni Anicic]

I'm disgusted by such "SEO companies" that lack the basic knowledge of ranking factors.

[webpromoterservice]

i see similar things all the time.

[Ali-v-8]

Gets better (or should i say worse).
After a call from said client for instructions on how to rectify the situation i gave the following instructions.
option 1 - remove the duplicate content.
option 2 - remove the urls altogether.

Client tried to get it removed. Company say this is good seo (£1,200's worth)
He says and i quote "I have been optimising on google for 22 years"
I fell about laughing. "22 years" well thats 3 times more than me, but then again i dont have time traveling abilities to go into the future.
"what do you mean?" he says.

well considering Google is 10 years old and the very first search engine was created in 1993 (called Aliweb.com by the way) how could you possibly have 22 years of google seo experience under your belt.
The next thing i heard was a dead tone. (ithink he dropped the phone)

[Ali-v-8]

Oh and archie doesnt count. before you say it.

[mattsaw]

option 3 - 301 all additional domains to the original/oldest/most linked to domain

Point the client to the article that I licked to in my last post by way of an explanation

[Ali-v-8]

client doesnt control the extra url or a 301 would have been ok.
This is a scam. they make people with no knowledge pay them installments for no reason.

But you are correct if they had the urls.

[JamieM]

In theory only 1 site will be indexed owing to duplicate content.


Ali-v-8, I'd be interested to know if the above was the case in practise? Was only one site indexed?

[Ali-v-8]

Sir earl is correct.

Ali-v-8, I'd be interested to know if the above was the case in practise? Was only one site indexed?

[JamieM]

Sir earl is correct.

Cool. Any indication as to why the one that indexed was the chosen one? Was it just the first one?

[Ali-v-8]

yes, but have problem with one page that needs to be rewritten because other url has been cached instead.



Cool. Any indication as to why the one that indexed was the chosen one? Was it just the first one?

[The Panda]

Slightly off topic.
Mattsaw, how come you have such huge hands. How do you use a keyboard with those shovels.:)

[Dawg]

One reason to get TLDs which hasn't been mentioned is to stop the competition getting them. Then you 301 'em.

[rubanj]

if the URL's are country specific and geo targetted it should be ok. But from what you have said there is a very high likelihood of google penalising for such practices.

a 301 permanent redirect should fix the problem.

[mattsaw]

Slightly off topic.
Mattsaw, how come you have such huge hands. How do you use a keyboard with those shovels.:)

I'm very sensitive about my monster hands :(

They do come in useful when explaining away my apalling typing ;)